Codicil does not have impact on genuineness of the will.

R.Jayasimha Babu, J.

1. The will executed by late Sri R.Kesava Iyengar who was the doyen of the Bar of this Court and had practised in this Court for a period of nearly seventy years from 1917 to 1987 and who died at the age of 98 on 9th November 1990 after executing a will on 05.06.1968 (Ex.P.2) bequeathing his house in Triplicane to his youngest son K.Yamunan, advocate, became the subject matter of T.O.S. No.25 of 1991 in which the letters of administration with a copy of the will annexed thereto sought by the plaintiff Yamunan was opposed by one of his step brothers Sadagopan. The will is a holograph one written in a firm hand by the testator. The will is attested by two witnesses -S.Parthasarathy, the elder son-in-law of the testator, and Narayanan, brother of Parthasarathy.

2. All five daughters by the third wife, as also two of the three sons by the second wife of the testator filed affidavits consenting to the grant of letters of administration in favour of Yamunan the only son by the third wife. The sole objector was Sadagopan, the third son of the testator by his second wife. The testator had been married thrice, the second marriage being after the demise of the first wife, who had died issueless, the third marriage having taken place after the demise of the second wife. Through the second wife the testator had three sons.

3. At the time of execution of the will the execution as also the will having been written by the testator himself not being disputed even by the caveator Sadagopan the persons residing with the testator were his third wife and their children, the three sons by the second wife by then having left the home of the testator, the last to leave being Sadagopen in the year 1960. All the sons by the second wife had left their father's home after their marriage.

4. The testator lived for twenty two years after he executed the will and had not felt the need to make any change therein. The testator's third wife predeceased him, she having passed away in 1978. It was stated by the plaintiff Yamunan in his evidence that the will was given to him by his father some time in the year 1980 after the testator's youngest daughter was married and that the will remained in the almirah in the house thereafter. He has also deposed that the testator had shown the will to his second son Sri.Parasaran in 1987. Yamunan has stated in his deposition that he had informed all his brothers and sisters shortly after the demise of his father, when the monthly ceremonies were being observed, about the execution of the will and had also offered to show them the xerox copies of the will.

5. The caveator Sadagopan had, in his written statement filed in the suit, contended that the plaintiff was scheming to take all the properties of the testator; that the will was the direct result of such scheming; that the plaintiff had, by coercive methods, made the testator to yield to his pressures and had generated a fear in the mind of the testator by his rude and rough and tough behaviour and created an atmosphere so deceitful and clandestine that the plaintiff alone could be the only ray of hope and help for the testator in his future life, and brought about pressure and signaled that the plaintiff could be the only hope for the testator to fall back upon. The fact that the testator had executed the will and that it was a document in the hand writing of the testator was not disputed. It was claimed by Sadagopan that he had typed numerous documents for his father during the years he stayed with him, i.e., till the year 1960; that his father was always in the habit of dictating and having the documents typed; that the will produced by the plaintiff could not have been written by him of his own free will and though the document has been executed physically, it was not executed by him mentally.

6. In support of the allegations of coercion, the burden of proving which was entirely upon the defendant, the only evidence produced was his